07 Edwards 8
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE CHRISTOLOGY OF TITUS 2:13 AND 1 TIMOTHY 2:5 J. Christopher Edwards Summary This article makes an acute observation about the strong similarities between Titus 2:11-14 and 1 Timothy 2:1-7. These similarities are significant because they suggest that it is not valid to translate Titus 2:13 as: ‘The glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ.’ This traditional translation affirms Jesus’ deity by ascribing to him the title of θεός . 1. Introduction ἐπιφάνειαν τῆς δόξης τοῦ µεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡµῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (Titus 2:13) Εἷς γὰρ θεός, εἷς καὶ µεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς (1 Timothy 2:5) Titus 2:13 is one of the few passages in the New Testament that could explicitly affirm Jesus’ deity by ascribing to him the title of 1 θεός . The connection between ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός and θεός in Titus 2:13 is founded on the grammatical principle known as Granville Sharp’s rule. In this short study, I will briefly review this rule and the translational options it affords Titus 2:13. I will then examine the greater context of Titus 2:11-14 and the parallel context of 1 Timothy 2:1-7. These two passages have strong similarities, which is not surprising since the same author likely wrote Titus and 1 Timothy. 2 1 Also see, for example, Rom. 9:5; 2 Pet. 1:1. 2 The argument of this short study rests on the widely held assumption that the same author wrote 1 Tim. and Titus. According to P. H. Towner, when the single authorship of the Pastorals is challenged, it is normally only to exclude 2 Tim. ( The Letters to Timothy and Titus [NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006]: 27). There are, however, some scholars who are attempting to revive an older argument that 1 Tim. and Titus 142 TYNDALE BULLETIN 62.1 (2011) Among these similarities are an emphasis on God’s universal salvation, an exhortation for godly living, and the influence of Isaiah 42:6-7; 49:6-8. Perhaps the most important similarity is the dependence on a tradition that is similar to Mark 10:45. The dependence on this tradition is widely recognised. What is not widely recognised, however, is that directly preceding this tradition in both Titus and 1 Timothy is a statement including θεός plus ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός or Χριστὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς. In 1 Timothy 2:5 it is obvious that the noun θεός does not apply to Χριστὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς. Given all the similarities between Titus 2:11-14 and 1 Timothy 2:1-7, we should come to the same conclusions regarding θεός and ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός in Titus 2:13. The purpose of this article is not to give an exhaustive account of the research surrounding the Christology of the Pastorals. Rather the purpose is to make an acute observation about the strong similarities between Titus 2:11-14 and 1 Timothy 2:1-7 and then to note the significance of those similarities for the Christology of Titus 2:13. 2. The Grammatical Argument According to D. B. Wallace, Granville Sharp’s rule asserts that in an article-noun-καί -noun construction ‘the second noun refers to the same person mentioned with the first noun when: (1) neither is im personal; (2) neither is plural ; (3) neither is a proper name’.3 In other words, both nouns in Sharp’s construction have the same referent when they are personal, singular, and not proper. Wallace has made the strongest case for the validity of Sharp’s rule in Titus 2:13. 4 If Wallace is correct then the entire construction, τοῦ µεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡµῶν, must refer to the same person. 5 There are two possible translations of have different authors. For example, J. Herzer argues that the author of 1 Tim. is dependent on Titus and 2 Tim., which were written earlier by a different author, or different authors (‘Rearranging the “House of God”: A New Perspective on the Pastoral Epistles’ in Empsychoi Logoi – Religious Innovations in Antiquity: Studies in Honour of Pieter Willem van der Horst , ed. A. Houtman, A. de Jong, and M. Misset- van de Weg [AJEC 73; Leiden: Brill, 2008]: 547-66). 3 D. B. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996): 271-72 – Italics original. 4 D. B. Wallace, Granville Sharp’s Canon and Its Kin: Semantics and Significance (SBG 14; New York: Peter Lang, 2009): 241-64. I chose to interact with Wallace simply because his work represents the most recent and extensive treatment of Granville Sharp’s rule. 5 This depends on θεός not being a proper name. EDWARDS: Christology of Titus 2:13 143 Titus 2:13 in which the entire construction does refer to the same person. The first, which is preferred by Wallace, translates Titus 2:13 as: ‘The glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ.’ In this translation the construction, τοῦ µεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ 6 σωτῆρος ἡµῶν, refers to Jesus Christ and explicitly affirms his deity. The second translation maintains Sharp’s rule, but does not identify Jesus with θεός . It translates Titus 2:13 as: ‘The appearance of the glory of our great God and saviour, Jesus Christ.’ In this translation the construction, τοῦ µεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡµῶν, refers to God (θεός ). ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός is seen to be in apposition to glory ( δόξα ), though glory is part of the entire phrase ‘the glory of our great God and saviour’.7 A final position believes that Granville Sharp’s rule does not apply to the construction in Titus 2:13, and the verse should be translated as: ‘The glorious appearing of the great God, and of our saviour Jesus Christ.’8 The purpose of the next section is to highlight an unnoticed line of contextual evidence that supports those who argue against identifying 6 In addition to Wallace, the other person typically cited in defence of this translation is M. J. Harris, ‘Titus 2:13 and the Deity of Christ’ in Pauline Studies: Essays Presented to Professor F. F. Bruce on His 70th Birthday , ed. D. A. Hagner and M. J. Harris (Exeter: Paternoster, 1980): 262-77; Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992): 173-85. Also see A. Y. Lau, Manifest in Flesh: The Epiphany Christology of the Pastoral Epistles (WUNT 2/86; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996): 243-50; G. W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992): 321-26; J. D. Quinn, The Letter to Titus (AB 35; New York: Doubleday, 1990): 155-56. 7 Those supporting this translation include G. Fee, Pauline Christology: An Exegetical-Theological Study (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007): 440-46; Towner, The Letters to Timothy and Titus , 750-58. It is significant for this translation that Jesus is associated with the appearance of the grace of God in Titus 2:11. Jesus is also associated with the appearance of ‘ the kindness and the love of mankind of God our saviour’ ( ἡ χρηστότης καὶ ἡ φιλανθρωπία ἐπεφάνη τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡµῶν θεοῦ) in Titus 3:4. Therefore, it should not be problematic for him to be associated with the appearance of the glory of our great God and saviour in Titus 2:13 (Jesus is closely associated with God’s glory elsewhere in Pauline literature [e.g. 2 Cor. 4:6]). However, Wallace argues that in Titus 2:13 the six words between δόξα and ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός create too great a distance for apposition ( Granville Sharp’s Canon , 257-58). This criticism can be dampened by asserting that the apposition in Titus 2:13 is between ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός and the whole phrase: ‘the glory of our great God and saviour’ (cf. Col. 2:2). 8 In support of this position, which is in the present minority, see M. Dibelius and H. Conzelmann, The Pastoral Epistles (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972; tr. P. Buttolph and A. Yarbro): 143; L. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003): 516 n. 69; F. Young, The Theology of The Pastoral Letters (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994): 53 n. 7. 144 TYNDALE BULLETIN 62.1 (2011) Jesus with θεός in Titus 2:13. This includes those who uphold Sharp’s rule, but see the construction, τοῦ µεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡµῶν, as referring to God, not Jesus. It also includes those who do not apply Sharp’s rule in Titus 2:13. 3. The Contextual Argument The force of the argument in this section is grounded on the strong similarities between the same author’s statements in Titus 2:11-14 and 1 Timothy 2:1-7. These similarities include: (1) the universal extension of salvation; (2) the exhortation for godly living; (3) the influence of Isaiah 42:6-7; 49:6-8; (4) the use of a tradition that is similar to Mark 10:45; (5) the introduction of the Mark 10:45 tradition with a reference to θεός plus ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός or Χριστὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς. Similarities one through three concern the greater contexts of Titus 2:11-14 and 1 Timothy 2:1-7. Similarities four and five address the tradition of which Titus 2:13 and 1 Timothy 2:5 are directly a part. It is important to note that similarities four and five are the most crucial ones for the argument, whereas similarities one through three are more supportive, so that if one does not agree with, for example, similarity number three (the common influence of Isaiah 42:6-7; 49:6-8) then that does not undercut the overall argument.